05A20713
08-08-2002
Carl Huie, Complainant, v. Michael K. Powell, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, Agency.
Carl Huie v. Federal Communications Commission
05A20713
August 8, 2002
.
Carl Huie,
Complainant,
v.
Michael K. Powell,
Chairman,
Federal Communications Commission,
Agency.
Request No. 05A20713
Appeal No. 01990380
Agency No. FCC-EEO-97-6
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Carl Huie (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in
Carl Huie v. Federal Communications Commission, EEOC Appeal No. 01990380
(March 14, 2002). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may,
in its discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision where the
requesting party demonstrates that: (1) the appellate decision involved
a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2)
the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,
practices, or operations of the agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
In our previous decision, we found that complainant had failed to present
sufficient evidence to prove that he had been discriminated against in
violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as
amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq., on the basis of his national origin
(Chinese-born Asian-American) when, on June 27, 1997, he was informed that
his request to be promoted, based on an accretion of duties, to a GS-14
Electronics Engineer position had been denied. Complainant contends in
his request for reconsideration that the Commission's previous decision
in this matter will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices,
or operations of the agency, because the decision did not address the
issue of unfair promotion practices at the agency which act as a �glass
ceiling� resulting in �zero representation� of foreign-born Asian-Pacific
Americans in the agency's GS/GM-15, supervisory, managerial, and Senior
Executive Service positions. We note, however, that complainant has not
presented any statistical or other evidence in support of this contention,
beyond his unsupported �zero representation� assertion. Accordingly,
we find that the Commission's previous decision correctly found that
complainant failed to present sufficient evidence to prove his claim of
unlawful disparate treatment, or which rebutted the agency's articulated
legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions regarding that
claim.
Furthermore, to the extent that complainant's glass ceiling assertion
can be construed as a claim that the agency's facially-neutral promotion
policies had a disparate impact on complainant and others of his protected
class, the record evidence is insufficient to support such a claim.
See Obas v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 01A04389 (May 16,
2002) (stating that, in general, to establish a prima facie case of
disparate impact, complainant must: (1) identify the specific practice
or practices challenged; (2) show statistical disparities; and (3)
show that the disparity is linked to the challenged practice or policy,
and that the burden is on complainant to show that the facially neutral
standard in question affects those individuals within the protected
group in a significantly discriminatory pattern) (citations and internal
punctuation omitted).
Therefore, after a review of complainant's request for reconsideration,
the previous decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that
the request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and
it is the decision of the Commission to deny the request. The decision
in EEOC Appeal No. 01990380 remains the Commission's final decision.
There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of
the Commission on this request for reconsideration.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)
This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right
of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the
right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District
Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive
this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant
in the complaint the person who is the official agency head or department
head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title.
Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court.
�Agency� or �department� means the national organization, and not the
local office, facility or department in which you work.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot
afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint
an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the
action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).
The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of
the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time
in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action
must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above
(�Right to File A Civil Action�).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
August 8, 2002
Date